View Full Version : Intels new chipset to support DX10?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20060425050400.html
Several slides, which presumably come from a roadmap of Intel Corp., that have been published over HKEPC web-site suggest that Intel’s forthcoming G965 chipset will have a built-in graphics core that not only supports DirectX 9.0 shader model 3.0, but also will have DirectX 10 shader model 4.0 functionality. In case the information is correct, this may be the first time for Intel Corp. to offer the latest multimedia functionality with its integrated graphics cores.
The Intel G965 graphics core will have relatively powerful support for 3D technologies in general: it will have improved early Z technology which reduces the load on memory bandwidth, it will support 16x anisotropic filtering, 32-bit precision floating point precision calculations and so on. As reported previously, it will also have hardware decoding of WMV9b HD high-definition video streams. In addition, the new integrated graphics core from the world’s largest chipmaker will provide HDMI output. It is unclear whether the new graphics core will support HDCP encryption as well.
Wow, HDMI output on an inegrated graphics chipset?
Wouldn't this be egg in the face for ATI and NVidia.
I think it would be great :) I think DX10 will catch on pretty quick.
I think it would be great :) I think DX10 will catch on pretty quick.
Thats a DAMN good point. Since this would be the entry level computer, all games could support DX10 without having to worry about the low end cards.
BRILLIANT!
Anything integrated will be slow...it won't compete with stand alone desktop cards powered by DX 10 GPUs from NV or ATi.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31239
Anything integrated will be slow...it won't compete with stand alone desktop cards powered by DX 10 GPUs from NV or ATi.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31239
Well of course. Even the newest Intel stuff is going to run like a GF2 at best, but at least it will have the technical features needed in DX10 to help make it widespread. Since, what, over 70% of all desktops are sold by Dell, and since Dell uses Intel almost exclusively...this will be a good thing for us gamers who keep on top of things.
Son Goku
04-26-06, 12:32 AM
I'm guessing people were thinking if ATI and nVidia chose to cover the lower end of the market with older cores, or with a "stripped down version", that doesn't include DX 10 support...
In a way, slow or not, it could give added incentive to ATI and nVidia to provide HDMI support at their entry level/cheapest card for the time Vista gets released. This would then of course mean something along the lines of a 7900 GS comming out in time to compete with Intel's newest chipset at the low end, rather then sometime after the higher end (more expensive) version gets released.
From Microsoft's standpoint, as well as those who would like to see an earlier adoption of the DX 10 feature set sooner rather then latter, this in a way would be good news, if it cuts back on the delay before some gave devs start thinking of incorporating DX 10 only features in their games. Then again, Microsoft might already have that covered in announcing that the successor to Halo will be DX 10 only, and to play it you will have to have Vista...
Well of course. Even the newest Intel stuff is going to run like a GF2 at best, but at least it will have the technical features needed in DX10 to help make it widespread. Since, what, over 70% of all desktops are sold by Dell, and since Dell uses Intel almost exclusively...this will be a good thing for us gamers who keep on top of things.
How so? Developers wil still have to into sccount many DX9 adopters...heck even DX8? ;)
It's all fine having the integrated chipsets being DX 10 compat but realistically, you will need stand alones to game DX10 games right? I expect DX10 (obvious) integrated chhipset from NV and ATi...to kick Intel's solution. The sad thing will be systems builders like Dell will sell by the volume discounted Intel stuff and proliferate the market with useless DX10 integrated chipsets
I bet the DX10 support is just there to be a checkbox feature, actual usability might be minimal, especially in games.
How so? Developers wil still have to into sccount many DX9 adopters...heck even DX8? ;)
It's all fine having the integrated chipsets being DX 10 compat but realistically, you will need stand alones to game DX10 games right? I expect DX10 (obvious) from NV and ATi...to kick Intel's solution. The sad thing will be systems builders like Dell will sell by the volume discounted Intel stuff and proliferate the market with useless DX10 integrated chipsets
Developers will have to account for DX9 and even DX8 for a while, but the sooner that the market gets saturated with DX10 parts the quicker the developers will switch over. Now that DX9 is the standard for almost EVERY part out there, DX7 is finally giving vanishing. I say that once DX10 becomes the norm for cards we'll begin to see support for DX8 being phased out.
It's not going to be a night and day difference because of Intel's effort, but its at least going to speed things up a little bit and I'm all for that.
Son Goku
04-26-06, 12:40 AM
I bet the DX10 support is just there to be a checkbox feature, actual usability might be minimal, especially in games.
I suspect you're correct. From an actual useability standpoint, it won't be very useful to the actual end user. And most likely it's being included as a check box feature... If however, it convinces ATI and nVidia to release the higher and lower end cards, useing a GPU that includes this functionality, around the same time, albeit at different clocks (aka GS like solution); then it might be useful in a round about way.
If nVidia and ATI don't change their development/release schedules to compete at the low end, instead thinking "that's nice, but try to use it...", then it might not help speed development along. Either way, people would still need an add on board, of which I agree with both MUYA as well as yourself...
AthlonXP1800
04-26-06, 12:41 AM
Wouldn't this be egg in the face for ATI and NVidia.
Yes ATI and Nvidia will throw eggs in the face of Intel when they will bite large marketshare of DirectX 10 from Intel. Their G965 chipset will be alot slower than Radeon X1300 and Geforce 7300 but none of DirectX 10 games will be able to be playable as games developers will try to make it not run like slideshow. I think Vista 3D effects and Glass will run like slideshow on Intel G965 chipset. They should exit 3D market when Vista ship, Intel cant compete with Nvidia and ATI on DirectX 10.
Developers will have to account for DX9 and even DX8 for a while, but the sooner that the market gets saturated with DX10 parts the quicker the developers will switch over. Now that DX9 is the standard for almost EVERY part out there, DX7 is finally giving vanishing. I say that once DX10 becomes the norm for cards we'll begin to see support for DX8 being phased out.
It's not going to be a night and day difference because of Intel's effort, but its at least going to speed things up a little bit and I'm all for that.
I think game devs look into the future when developing a game mostly. The latest bells and whistles so DX10 adoption would have been there regardless. I just tend to think an integrated dx10 chipset from Intel would do sqwat but give you a demographic pie chart showing there is more of dx10 parts including dx10 integrated chipsets then anything else. ;) Nothing special. The game devs would already have accounted for DX10 depending on their estimed time to launch. :)
They should exit 3D market when Vista ship, Intel cant compete with Nvidia and ATI on DirectX 10.
Yes they can when large systems builders such as Dell can just ship columes of the integrated stuff from Intel. Huge discounts anyone?
Son Goku
04-26-06, 12:55 AM
I think game devs look into the future when developing a game mostly. The latest bells and whistles so DX10 adoption would have been there regardless. I just tend to think an integrated dx10 chipset from Intel would do sqwat but give you a demographic pie chart showing there is more of dx10 parts including dx10 integrated chipsets then anything else. ;) Nothing special. The game devs would already have accounted for DX10 depending on their estimed time to launch. :)
Well, when they look at the future (considering that development does take time, and the game won't be out there immediately), this is grounded a bit in the motive of trying to recover costs (in developing the game), and turn a profit through increased sales...
If DX 10 support is limited to the higher end $400 or $500+ cards, and most of the market is incapable of affording them, this would leave a rather small potential customer base. Ideally, a person with a more average (and hence cheaper) end system would be able to run the thing, at an at least OK level of performance, perhaps at 640x480, or perhaps 800x600 screen res.
If on the other hand, a game was left needing DX 10 support, and only those who could afford the most expensive cards was able to afford it, the potential sales might be enough for the software dev to turn a profit, and it might not be. If they estimate, from a purely business decision, that the customer base won't be large enough to bring in enough sales, they won't release it as such...
Part of what they care about with the future isn't just what features will be there, but how they can maximize profits at the time they're expecting their game to come out. If that means sticking with DX 9, because DX 10 cards haven't saturated the market enough, then for purely financial reasons, this is what they'd do...
Well, game developers could focus more on the DX10 paths of games, optimizing and such, since obviously a very large portion of their users will be on low end DX10 parts.
Remember with the Geforce4MX did to the market? A DX7 chip, it still hurts the gaming industry today as many people have these cards. Game developers are forced to throw in a DX7 path for these users.
This is so important to the gaming industry, that I think Microsoft should throw in a "feature test" into the WHQL process. Want WHQL? Gotta support, DX10, HDCP, etc. I think these are very important, especially including HDCP into the WHQL spec, this will force companies to comply with that, as from the end users standpoint, WHQL is very important. (even though, it has very little importance overall)
Well, game developers could focus more on the DX10 paths of games, optimizing and such, since obviously a very large portion of their users will be on low end DX10 parts.
Remember with the Geforce4MX did to the market? A DX7 chip, it still hurts the gaming industry today as many people have these cards. Game developers are forced to throw in a DX7 path for these users.
This is so important to the gaming industry, that I think Microsoft should throw in a "feature test" into the WHQL process. Want WHQL? Gotta support, DX10, HDCP, etc. I think these are very important, especially including HDCP into the WHQL spec, this will force companies to comply with that, as from the end users standpoint, WHQL is very important. (even though, it has very little importance overall)
optimizing for dx10 paths which is playabkle at res of 640 by 480? I mean realistically these integrated chipsets would be lucky ..if they get gaming performance at 800 by 600 with a lot of features turned down. The intel chipset would be to addressed the dx10 features for Aero?
I doubt even if the integrated chipset is dx10 compat...it would be compat only. Gaming performance would be dire. Yes it might be nice to have every desktop adopt the latest gaming API but it means nothing if the majority cannot even play the Dx10 games themselves. If the chipsets performs decent then thats a good thing but, depending on previous histiry of integrated chipsets, that is asking too much to ask for in a integrated chipset. transisor costs, bandwidth limitations, overall costs, yields etc from hisotry all point to integrated chipsets being servely limited and with that in mind, it is MHO that game devs would hardly give that a thought. Too much resources optimizing for something that won't return on their investment.
When Dx10 comes out, I am sure it will even cripple the latest stand alones anyway they (devs) will have a hard time optimizing for that nevermind integrated stuff :p. And imposing certain criteria drives costs for eveything and slows process down. In a business model that might not work. Just my HO.
:)
loafer87gt
04-26-06, 01:33 AM
It sounds like Intel has really dropped the ball with its new DX10 integrated chipset. I am trying to find the link, but I read a site this morning with a developer talking about how the new Intel DX10 graphics set is really going to hold back the new games. At the end of the article, they said that the new Intel graphics subsystem is based on a very slow 4 pipeline design. :(
I'll post the article if I can find it.
Well, we all know its going to be slow... Intel graphics chipsets are famous for being slow :)
Well, we all know its going to be slow... Intel graphics chipsets are famous for being slow :)
Famous for being EXTREME:D
Famous for being EXTREME:D
EXTREMEly slow :)
Wow, HDMI output on an inegrated graphics chipset?
The only thing I like about it is the HDMI but Dx10 lol ok so they can support the new features but get 10FPS @ 640x480 whats the point.
Demon_82
04-26-06, 02:29 PM
Intel will still be the main graphic card manufacturer with the IGP market... and by a large percentage margin, thanks to the OEM and mobile sales. It'll be nice if they decided to make a new standalone card (the i740 is that far, far away in th past), they have loads of money to fund the project and a fair technologic base, and a third competitor will spice up the market, pricing specially. I don't bet to see it, but it'll be easier than to see it from S3.
Just another checkmark feature, i doubt this igp will even run vista with aero turned on.
Just another checkmark feature, i doubt this igp will even run vista with aero turned on.
I think it should, there are different quality levels aswell I think.
I dont think Aero is very GPU intensive really, not sure but I think it will run on even the most lowend DX9 GPUs, and I suspect the HyperMemory and Turbocache techs on the lowend stuff is partly targeting Aero since it WILL need a certain amount of memory.
But it most certainly wont be any good for gaming.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.